IN THE CHAIR : MR . ONYSZKIEWICZVice-President
Approval of the Record of the previous session ( See the Record )
Budget procedure 2005
The President .
In agreement with the agenda , we proceed to the joint debate of two reports on behalf of the Budget Commission concerning the general budget project for 2005 .
In the first place , the report ( A 6 - 0021/2004 ) of Mister Garriga Polledo concerning the general budget project for 2005 ( Section III ) ;
and next , the report ( A 6 - 0020/2004 ) of mistress Elisabet Jensen concerning the general budget project for 2005 ( Sections I , II , IV , V , VI , VII , and VIII ) .
The list of speakers for the debate on these questions is very large , therefore I kindly invite the speaker , mister Garriga Polledo , to take the word .
Garriga Polledo ( PPE.O.F ) , speaker .
- ( ES ) Mister President , mister President in functions of the Council , mistress Commissary , colleagues , we said in the Plenary of September that we were receiving a budget project from the Council obeying to a more accounting than political reading .
On Thursday we shall vote , here , in the Parliament , a clearly political budget reading .
Political because it responds to the political priorities with which the parliamentary groups and the deputies ran for the European elections of the 13 th June .
And we remind you that who ran for those elections was the Parliament - your ladies and gentlemen - , not the Council .
All your ladies and gentlemen signed a contract with the electors that includes to defend and sponsor measures that , so I hope , will have a reflection in this budget project I present for your approval .
And it is political , too , because it responds to a usual strategy of the Council , which is to finance their priorities rather than the priorities of the Parliament .
This means , with the ballot of next Thursday we shall try to balance the inter-institutional balance , balance without which the European Union is unable to work properly .
Please allow me , mister President , to say a few words to the Commissary , who ceases today as a member of the European Commission .
A Budgets Commissary always has a very difficult role to play between the Parliament and the Council - two budget authorities condemned to understand each other though , in certain opportunities , it may seem that an agreement is very far away - .
For the budget peace of these years , mistress the Commissary is responsible to a great extent , and therefore , I want to say it , thanks to the agreements mistress the Commissary and her team presented in the last minute , we achieved to save complicated situations .
I hope that in her new life , beyond Brussels , she will have as much success as during these years .
In any case , I want her to know that for all people related with the budget it was a pleasure to work with her .
They will be necessary , the virtues of patience and of negotiation the old Commissary used to have - and let 's hope the new one will have - with this first reading by the European Parliament , because it differs greatly from the first reading made by the Council .
As speaker and senior member of the Budget Commission since ten years , I am perfectly able to distinguish between the limits of what can be demanded and political reality .
But there are certain start positions that can not be abandoned by this Chamber .
Realistic for the European Parliament is to defend its priorities in view of a budget situation that is very difficult and very restrictive .
In general lines , we accept the preliminary budget project of the Commission , modified by the competent commissions , political groups and individual deputies who have suggested amendments to us .
As you already know , there have been technical adjustments to the maximum limits of chapters 3 , 4 , and 5 , which in themselves already represent an almost insurmountable difficulty for reaching the figures of the 2004 budget .
Our colleague Mulder - speaker of the 2004 budget - did a brilliant budget year .
I am trying to do the same for this year , though I know that , in any case , the financial resources available to me are smaller than those of last year .
The Council has reduced internal policies in 55 million Euros with respect to the preliminary budget project , creating an impossible margin of 108 million Euros .
The amendments presented by you - ladies and gentlemen deputies - to this budget project , only in this chapter 3 , amount to more than 350 million Euros .
And any and all those amendments are perfectly justified .
The Council reduced foreign policies in 129 million Euros with respect to the preliminary budget project of the Commission , leaving a margin of 14 millions , where the resulting negative margin in commission amounted to 115 million Euros and already seriously handicapped the traditional foreign priorities of the Parliament .
The amendments to this chapter 4 amount to more than 400 million Euros , and this speaker has to take them into consideration , partly , because they respond fundamentally to the desires uttered by two important parliamentary commissions : the Development Commission and the Commission for Foreign Affairs .
In chapter 5 - where in principle it might have looked more easy to reach an agreement - , the Council by itself made a few cuts that situated the administrative expenditure of the Commission and of the other institutions one and a half points below the provisions of the preliminary project of the Commission and it is very complicated - as the Commissary knows only too well - to maintain an administrative budget calculated to the millimetre when another institution comes later and reduces it .
Thanks God , the Commission - and congratulations again to mistress the Commissary - achieved to make a supplementary effort in saving without losing efficiency .
In any case , I have to say that the European Parliament wants to re-establish the administrative expenditure recorded in the preliminary budget project .
Under these circumstances , we had to establish a series of priorities .
These have been :
In the first place , the Lisbon strategy and its policy of growth and creation of employment , because they appear in practically all political programmes under which your ladies and gentlemen ran for these elections .
In a moment of difficult and poor economic growth in the European Union it would be suicidal not to reinforce those policies , the objective of which is precisely the growth , the development and the creation of employment .
Therefore , we voted amendments increasing in 80 millions these lines found in the Lisbon strategy .
In the second place , in the communication strategy , because , especially after the European elections and the abstention occurred in these elections , because we had a expansion and it is necessary to explain much better the idea of the Union to the new citizens and because we have a constitutional debate about the future of the European Union , this constitutes another priority for the Parliament and therefore we presented an amendment for a value of 24 million Euros .
In the third place , the reinforcement of security , the crusade against terrorism and the consolidation of a European strategy in matters of immigration and asylum .
I think that this is a priority joined by all of you and it needs not to be explained , unfortunately , why this should be a priority of the Parliament and of the European Union in 2005 .
In the fourth place , as one more of the fundamental priorities , there is the consolidation of an action outside the European Union , with a special emphasis on fighting disease and poverty and on the attention to geographic areas .
Here we follow the principle that the new commitments outside the European Union should not be achieved at the cost of the traditional priorities of the Parliament , or what is the same , of new commitments , new resources .
In the fifth place , we wish a very serious debate with the Council concerning the financing of the decentralized agencies , which I shall analyse later .
I would like to underscore the support received from the political Groups when translating these priorities into budget amendments .
I only received support , positive suggestions , and backing from the rest of the coordinators .
All of them have sacrificed other priorities , all had to give complicated explanations to their colleagues about the decisions adopted .
And this is a message I wish to be received - both by the Commission and the Council - very clearly : this first reading expresses a clear and unequivocal political commitment for the negotiation in November .
We are not going to vote a second reading that abandons unilaterally our priorities .
If there have to be sacrifices , they will have to be made by all institutions , by everyone .
Now let us review the reading chapter by chapter , remembering that the European Parliament will take the ballot of next Thursday as a global whole , and that , as such , during the negotiation , we will direct it towards the dialogues at three levels and towards conciliation .
In chapter 1 - Agriculture - we voted 50 779 million Euros in commitment credits .
Our reference guide was the preliminary budget project presented by the Commission , though we have still pending the provision of credits necessary to comply with the Copenhagen criteria .
In sub-chapter 1 b ) we have a political priority that was expressed by the Budget Commission and that , as such , will appear in the ballot of next Thursday .
According to this , we increase the quantity of 57 million Euros beyond the maximum limit of sub-chapter 1 b ) , the item that would be assigned to the establishment and training of young farmers .
We also increased the credits for measures to eradicate animal diseases and for food safety , because these , too , are priorities of the Parliament .
In chapter 2 we are going to vote 42 378 million Euros in commitment credits .
In this category what is fundamental are the payments , the category where the amendments we presented concerning payments have a more powerful impact .
To avoid and absorb the credits awaiting settlement ( RAL ) , which already amount to , ladies and gentlemen , 122 000 million Euros - equal to a budget year - we increase the preliminary budget project in those lines where the RAL amount to twice the annual commitments .
In the remaining lines we back the request for payments made by the Commission and which we expect that the Council will take into consideration .
Therefore , we elevate our request for payments to 3 800 million Euros .
In chapter 3 - Internal Policies - , we vote 9 012 million Euros , we leave a margin zero and we vote an amendment with asterisk .
In any case - besides the traditional horizontal amendments made to performance facilities and the improvements in execution - , what we fundamentally pretend in this chapter is to discuss the financing of the Agencies very seriously with the Council .
Look , ladies and gentlemen , from 2000 to 2005 , the number of decentralized Agencies - which was a idea of this Parliament , I remember the budget procedure where it was adopted - has grown from 7 to 23 .
The budget of the Agencies has grown from 96 to 281 million Euros and for the next 2005 budget we expect an increment of 20 % .
The number of items assigned to the Agencies grew from 418 in the year 2000 to 2695 .
All this has meant a reduction in the maximum limit of the chapter of about 134 million Euros for financing the remaining priorities .
This speaker can not accept this situation and what he proposes to the Council is a very serious negotiation .
To propose this negotiation with the spokeswoman for the Agencies in this Parliament - mistress Haug - , we presented an amendment that affects all Agencies and that entails a reduction of 40 million Euros , leaving the budget for agencies at the level of the 2004 budget .
In this case , what we pretend is , firstly , to point out that the financing of any supplementary increment the Council might pretend with the Agencies of new implant has to be discussed with this Parliament , because inside the financial boundaries within which we move , where the financial perspectives are established from the year 2000 up to the year 2006 , this annual increment of the Agencies is already being made in detriment of the priorities of the Parliament , and the Parliament has more political priorities than the Agencies , though the Agencies are , of course , something that has to be financed , and we shall also commit ourselves to do so .
I would like to speak about the pilot projects .
We have already agreed an acceptable package with the political Groups .
Some of them have an enormous interest , as may be that of small and medium-sized companies , the pilot project against terrorism , the one concerning reduction of nuclear armament , or that of conflict prevention .
I think that we are getting an extensive and ambitious package .
In the same way , in the preparatory actions I would like to underscore the parliamentary agreement concerning the voluntary return of immigrants , the help for fighting diseases related with poverty - to which we dedicate 10 million Euros , which I think constitutes an important financial support - and , also the new strategy we followed to deviate certain pilot projects to the subject of studies .
Finally , in chapter 4 we voted 5 119 million Euros - plus an amendment with asterisk - .
Fundamentally , what happens in chapter 4 is that here we find again that we have to finance Iraq .
This financing was not scheduled for 2005 , and what is pretended from us is that we finance in detriment of the traditional priorities of the Parliament , as is the foreign policy voted by the parliamentarians this year , the previous year and in the year 2000 .
This can not be neither .
Therefore , attending to what was suggested to us by the Development Commission and the Commission for Foreign Affairs , we requested this chapter to be financed using the new resources foreseen in the Inter-Institutional Agreement for a supplementary value of 190 million Euros .
At the same time , we also question - or we include in the same package - the foreign policy and that of Common Security , so important to this Parliament , but the financing of which should be contemplated within the general framework of what is necessary to be financed in chapter 4 .
Mister President , we are submitting a proposal which I hope will be voted with a large majority by our colleagues on next Thursday and that will entail a serious negotiating position in front of the Council , because , I repeat , what we are taking in consideration are the political priorities established by this Parliament .
( Applauses )
Jensen ( ALDE ) , speaker .
- ( DA ) Mister President , mister Minister , mistress Commissary , I wish to begin thanking you , Commissary Schreyer , who participates today in his last budget reading , and the same to mister Garriga , I am sorry for this being so .
I remember the relations that existed between the Parliament and the Commission in matters of budgets when you took on your position , a little more than five years ago .
When entering the room of the commission to speak about budget questions , you could notice the coldness in the air , because the relations were no good after the fall of the Santer Commission .
There was much mistrust between the Commission and the Parliament and very harsh things were said .
I think that , with your way of working , mistress Schreyer , and with your way of doing things , you made an enormous contribution to re-establishing the confidence between the Parliament and the Commission .
For this you have my compliments .
I really think that extraordinary successes have been achieved in these five years .
I have to say something about the budgets of the other institutions .
Mister Garriga and myself jointly decided to follow the strategy of trying to find the largest possible quantity of funds within the fifth item of expenditures , so that we could return a great part of the savings agreed by the Council and thus fulfil the desire of increasing the staff as a result of the expansion , the staff reform and the changes in financial management .
When we analyse the budgets of the Court of Justice , the Audit Office , the European Economic and Social Committee , the Committee of the Regions , the Defender of the People and the European Data Protection Supervisor , the budget we are presenting now , and that has been approved in the Budget Commission , is 10 million Euros higher than the preliminary budget of the Council .
So , we have returned almost two thirds of the savings of the Council , and this makes it possible in practice for all institutions to increase their staff as a result of the expansion , the staff reform and the financial management reform .
I am pleased that , thanks to the dialogue with the institutions , a valid solution satisfactory for all , or at least so I hope , was achieved , and I wish to thank you for your constructive work in this process .
